DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Running Head: Ideological Bias in Social Psychology Measurement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 Running Head: Ideological Bias in Social Psychology Measurement Running head: Ideological bias in social psychology measurement Ideological measurement in social and political psychology Craig A. Harper Nottingham Trent University (UK) Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to: Dr. Craig Harper Department of Psychology, Nottingham Trent University 50 Shakespeare Street, Nottingham, NG1 4FQ, UK Email: [email protected] Tel.: +44 (0)115 848 4718 Twitter: @CraigHarper19 1 Abstract As social psychology undergoes marked changes in its approach to research (e.g., open science practices, and addressing the replication crisis), it is important to undertake a full review of the tools and measures that we have at our disposal. In addition, the growing sense of political and ideological polarization in contemporary western democracies necessitates a coherent and internally consistent approach to studying politically and ideologically sensitive topics. This paper explores the measurement and study of such topics, and posits that claims about (a)symmetries between ideological partisans may be rooted in different measurement approaches. That is, studies (and researchers) who report widespread differences (asymmetries) between partisan liberals and conservatives typically adopt individual difference designs that examine trait-level constructs. In contrast, those who typically report similarities (symmetries) between these groups collect situationally derived data. A more consistent and ecologically valid approach to studying partisan engagement with political topics is advocated, focusing on situational responses to ideologically salient scenarios, rather than placing our focus on results from decontextualized self-report individual difference measures. Underpinning this review are three key assertions. First, that our ideological homogeneity as a field blinds us to hidden biases in our methods. Second, that the aforementioned (a)symmetry camps talk past each other by adopting different epistemological approaches. Third, that addressing these shortcomings can allow us to better conform to the Mertonian norms of communalism, universalism, disinterestedness, and organized skepticism. In doing so, we can revive our status as an open, accurate, and reproducible scientific field. Key words: measurement, political polarization, ideological bias, individual differences, ideological symmetry hypothesis 2 Ideological measurement in social and political psychology The landscape of social psychology is currently undergoing some stark changes. Emerging practices to address the ‘replication crisis’ (Brandt et al., 2014; Lindsay, 2015) and the advent of increasingly open research practices, such as data- and materials-sharing, protocol and analytic pre-registration, and the peer-review of research plans before data are collected and results are known (Chambers, 2018; van’t Veer & Giner-Sorolla, 2016; Washburn et al., 2018) have led the field to consider some of the questionable research practices that have historically persisted in some spheres (Motyl et al., 2017; Ritchie, 2020). Although these movements are clearly positive for the state of our science, they focus only on the higher-level processes associated with potential biases in research design and execution. These initiatives focus on addressing our conscious biases, such as switching outcome variables, continuing to collect data until p < .05, and manipulating our statistical models to produce parsimonious (and, importantly, statistically significant) accounts of human behavior (Ritchie, 2020). This paper, however, takes a look at the unconscious or hidden biases of social and personality psychological research, as applied in the political domain, to explore ideological basis of the conceptualization and interpretation of research in these areas. That is, there is an argument to be made that our current approaches to studying similarities and differences between those from competing political or ideological persuasions (from here, these similarities and differences are referred to as ‘political/ideological (a)symmetries’) may contain epistemic biases on the part of the field in the aggregate. In doing so, a critique of commonly used measurement tools in the political psychology domain is offered, and further suggestions for alternative approaches to researching ideological (a)symmetries are offered that are consistent with the continuing the recent advances in social psychological research. 3 The first half of this paper presents a critical commentary of the existing theorizing on the importance of ideological diversity in (psychological) science, before a review of the existing literature on ideological (a)symmetries. Both of these review sections are necessary as they are interlinked, with the lack of diversity in social and political psychology guiding the questions we asked, and the tools that we used to answer them (Clark & Winegard, 2020; Duarte et al., 2015; Honeycutt & Jussim, 2020). Thus, the extent of our lack of diversity has implications for the types of studies we run, and subsequently the extent to which we find (a)symmetries in our studies. Once these initial reviews have been provided, the central thesis of the article is introduced. Here, the distinction between dispositional (trait-level) and situational (behavior- level) (a)symmetries is described. The paper then presents a manifesto for reform, both in terms of revising our understanding and measurement of core constructs in a specific sense, and in terms of broadening the range of hypotheses that we test. At its core, the fundamental contribution of this article is thus not in its review of the extant literature on ideological (a)symmetries. It is in its ‘call to action’ for us to take stock of our existing practice and to work towards the Mertonian norms of communalism (collaborative practice), universalism (scientific validity across samples), disinterestedness (striving for accuracy, rather than confirmation), and organized skepticism (active attempts to scrutinize our fundamental assumptions). The importance of ideological diversity in psychological science The concept of diversity is becoming an increasingly controversial one. For decades, scholars examining diversity, prejudice, (in)tolerance, and intergroup hate have focused on so-called ‘protected characteristics’ (Chakraborti & Garland, 2012), such as sex, age, race, religion, sexual proclivity, and, more recently, gender identity when examining levels of 4 diversity in a range of settings (for a review, see Crawford, 2018). However, an emerging form of diversity – ideological diversity – is being increasingly discussed at the societal level, thanks predominantly to high-profile administrative developments (e.g., in the enactment of speech codes, speaker disinvitations, mandatory unconscious bias training, microaggression policies, and academic freedom disputes) on U.S. college campuses (Beinart, 2017; Jussim, 2018). Broadly defined, ideological diversity refers to the presence of a plurality of different worldviews and epistemologies and is said to be one of the cornerstones of higher education (Routledge, 2016). However, work conducted by Duarte et al. (2015) established that social psychologists have become increasingly homogenous in their ideological views since the end of the second world war (see also Inbar & Lammers, 2012). Up until the beginning of the 1960s, there was around a 2:1 ratio of self-reported liberals to republicans in among social psychologists (McClintock et al., 1965). This ratio represents twice as many liberals within the field as compared to conservatives, but this is not surprising given some of the established personality differences that have been consistently cited within the political psychological literature (for a review, see Jost, 2017a). For instance, liberals in the aggregate score higher on the ‘Big 5’ personality trait of openness to experience, which is comprised of an aspect related to openness to ideas and intellectual pursuits (DeYoung et al., 2007), which is consistent with the regular activity and general aims of a university education. Nonetheless, according to Redding (2015), “[n]o American institution has embraced cultural and demographic diversity more than the academy, and nowhere with greater enthusiasm than in the social sciences” (p. 1). In chasing this cultural and demographic diversity, the importance of ideological diversity, or diversity of thought, appears to have been lost (or perhaps rejected outright). This is exemplified by recent analyses showing that approximately two-thirds of academics in social psychology identify as politically liberal, and a Democrat-to-Republican 5 voting ratio of more than 17:1 (Duarte et al., 2015; Inbar & Lammers, 2012; Von Hippel & Buss, 2018; though see Skitka (2012) for an earlier discussion of the limitations of trying to establish population estimates of field-wide ideological divisions). The ideological homogeneity within social psychology poses a threat to each of the four Mertonian scientific norms, which reduces our adherence to the scientific process and an impartial pursuit of truth. In relation to communalism, our field is often siloed into competing ‘teams’ that appear to favor different views of ideological (a)symmetries. On the one hand are those researchers who adhere to the view that conservatives and liberals are distinctly different (e.g., Jost, 2017a). On the other hand, there are researchers who focus to a greater extent to ideological biases within social psychology that pathologizes political
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cancel Culture: Posthuman Hauntologies in Digital Rhetoric and the Latent Values of Virtual Community Networks
    CANCEL CULTURE: POSTHUMAN HAUNTOLOGIES IN DIGITAL RHETORIC AND THE LATENT VALUES OF VIRTUAL COMMUNITY NETWORKS By Austin Michael Hooks Heather Palmer Rik Hunter Associate Professor of English Associate Professor of English (Chair) (Committee Member) Matthew Guy Associate Professor of English (Committee Member) CANCEL CULTURE: POSTHUMAN HAUNTOLOGIES IN DIGITAL RHETORIC AND THE LATENT VALUES OF VIRTUAL COMMUNITY NETWORKS By Austin Michael Hooks A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of Master of English The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga Chattanooga, Tennessee August 2020 ii Copyright © 2020 By Austin Michael Hooks All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT This study explores how modern epideictic practices enact latent community values by analyzing modern call-out culture, a form of public shaming that aims to hold individuals responsible for perceived politically incorrect behavior via social media, and cancel culture, a boycott of such behavior and a variant of call-out culture. As a result, this thesis is mainly concerned with the capacity of words, iterated within the archive of social media, to haunt us— both culturally and informatically. Through hauntology, this study hopes to understand a modern discourse community that is bound by an epideictic framework that specializes in the deconstruction of the individual’s ethos via the constant demonization and incitement of past, current, and possible social media expressions. The primary goal of this study is to understand how these practices function within a capitalistic framework and mirror the performativity of capital by reducing affective human interactions to that of a transaction.
    [Show full text]
  • Connecting Levels of Analysis in Educational Neuroscience: a Review of Multi-Level
    1 Connecting Levels of Analysis in Educational Neuroscience: A Review of Multi-level 2 Structure of Educational Neuroscience with Concrete Examples 3 Hyemin Han1*, Firat Soylu1*, D. Mona Anchan1 4 Educational Psychology Program, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, United States 5 6 Corresponding Author: 7 Hyemin Han1 8 9 Email address: [email protected] 10 11 *These authors contributed equally to this work. The authors’ names are listed 12 alphabetically. 2 13 Abstract 14 In its origins educational neuroscience has started as an endeavor to discuss 15 implications of neuroscience studies for education. However, it is now on its way to 16 become a transdisciplinary field, incorporating findings, theoretical frameworks and 17 methodologies from education, and cognitive and brain sciences. Given the differences and 18 diversity in the originating disciplines, it has been a challenge for educational neuroscience 19 to integrate both theoretical and methodological perspective in education and neuroscience 20 in a coherent way. We present a multi-level framework for educational neuroscience, 21 which argues for integration of multiple levels of analysis, some originating in brain and 22 cognitive sciences, others in education, as a roadmap for the future of educational 23 neuroscience with concrete examples in mathematical learning and moral education. 24 Keywords: educational neuroscience; multi-level theoretical framework; 25 neuroimaging; meta-analysis; educational intervention 26 27 Educational neuroscience is a vast and emerging field that incorporates methods 28 and perspectives from brain and cognitive sciences, learning sciences, and educational 29 psychology, among others. In its origins educational neuroscience started as an initiative 30 to discuss implications of neuroscience findings for education.
    [Show full text]
  • Trump's Disinformation 'Magaphone'. Consequences, First Lessons and Outlook
    BRIEFING Trump's disinformation 'magaphone' Consequences, first lessons and outlook SUMMARY The deadly insurrection at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021 was a significant cautionary example of the offline effects of online disinformation and conspiracy theories. The historic democratic crisis this has sparked − adding to a number of other historic crises the US is currently battling − provides valuable lessons not only for the United States, but also for Europe and the democratic world. The US presidential election and its aftermath saw domestic disinformation emerging as a more visible immediate threat than disinformation by third countries. While political violence has been the most tangible physical effect of manipulative information, corrosive conspiracy theories have moved from the fringes to the heart of political debate, normalising extremist rhetoric. At the same time, recent developments have confirmed that the lines between domestic and foreign attempts to undermine democracy are increasingly blurred. While the perceived weaknesses in democratic systems are − unsurprisingly − celebrated as a victory for authoritarian state actors, links between foreign interference and domestic terrorism are under growing scrutiny. The question of how to depolarise US society − one of a long list of challenges facing the Biden Administration − is tied to the polarised media environment. The crackdown by major social media platforms on Donald Trump and his supporters has prompted far-right groups to abandon the established information ecosystem to join right-wing social media. This could further accelerate the ongoing fragmentation of the US infosphere, cementing the trend towards separate realities. Ahead of the proposed Democracy Summit − a key objective of the Biden Administration − tempering the 'sword of democracy' has risen to the top of the agenda on both sides of the Atlantic.
    [Show full text]
  • Researching Violent Extremism the State of Play
    Researching Violent Extremism The State of Play J.M. Berger RESOLVE NETWORK | JUNE 2019 Researching Violent Extremism Series The views in this publication are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the RESOLVE Network, its partners, the U.S. Institute of Peace, or any U.S. government agency. 2 RESOLVE NETWORK RESEARCH REPORT NO. 1 | LAKE CHAD BASIN RESEARCH SERIES The study of violent extremism is entering a new phase, with shifts in academic focus and policy direction, as well as a host of new and continuing practical and ethical challenges. This chapter will present an overview of the challenges ahead and discuss some strategies for improving the state of research. INTRODUCTION The field of terrorism studies has vastly expanded over the last two decades. As an illustrative example, the term “terrorism” has been mentioned in an average of more than 60,000 Google Scholar results per year since 2010 alone, including academic publications and cited works. While Google Scholar is an admittedly imprecise tool, the index provides some insights on relative trends in research on terrorism. While almost 5,000 publications indexed on Google Scholar address, to a greater or lesser extent, the question of “root causes of terrorism, at the beginning of this marathon of output, which started soon after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, only a fractional number of indexed publications addressed “extremism.” Given the nature of terrorist movements, however, this should be no great mys- tery. The root cause of terrorism is extremism. Figure 1: Google Scholar Results per Year1 Publications mentioning terrorism Publications mentioning extremism 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 Google Scholar Results 10,000 0 Year 1 Google Scholar, accessed May 30, 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • A Diffusion Model Analysis of Belief Bias: Different Cognitive Mechanisms Explain How Cogni
    A diffusion model analysis of belief bias: Different cognitive mechanisms explain how cogni- tive abilities and thinking styles contribute to conflict resolution in reasoning Anna-Lena Schuberta, Mário B. Ferreirab, André Matac, & Ben Riemenschneiderd aInstitute of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany, E-mail: anna- [email protected] bCICPSI, Faculdade de Psicologia, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal, E-mail: mferreira@psi- cologia.ulisboa.pt cCICPSI, Faculdade de Psicologia, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal, E-mail: aomata@psico- logia.ulisboa.pt dInstitute of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany, E-mail: riemenschnei- [email protected] Word count: 17,116 words Author Note Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Anna-Lena Schubert, Institute of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Hauptstrasse 47-51, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany, Phone: +49 (0) 6221-547354, Fax: +49 (0) 6221-547325, E-mail: anna-lena.schubert@psy- chologie.uni-heidelberg.de. The authors thank Joana Reis for her help in setting up the experi- ment, and Adrian P. Banks and Christopher Hope for sharing their experimental material. THE ROLE OF COGNITIVE ABILITIES AND THINKING STYLES IN REASONING 2 Abstract Recent results have challenged the widespread assumption of dual process models of belief bias that sound reasoning relies on slow, careful reflection, whereas biased reasoning is based on fast intuition. Instead, parallel process models of reasoning suggest that rule- and belief- based problem features are processed in parallel and that reasoning problems that elicit a con- flict between rule- and belief-based problem features may also elicit more than one Type 1 re- sponse. This has important implications for individual-differences research on reasoning, be- cause rule-based responses by certain individuals may reflect that these individuals were ei- ther more likely to give a rule-based default response or that they successfully inhibited and overrode a belief-based default response.
    [Show full text]
  • Dispositional Cognitive Effort Investment and Behavioral Demand Avoidance
    Dispositional Cognitive Effort Investment and Behavioral Demand Avoidance: Are They Related? Alexander Strobel1*, Gesine Wieder1, Philipp C. Paulus1,2, Florian Ott1, Sebastian Pannasch1, Stefan J. Kiebel1, & Corinna Kührt1* 1 Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden 2 Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences Leipzig Author note Alexander Strobel, Corinna Kührt, Florian Ott, Sebastian Pannasch, Stefan Kiebel, Gesine Wieder, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, 01062 Dresden, Germany; Philipp C. Paulus, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences Leipzig, Stephanstraße 1a, 04103 Leipzig, Germany. * These authors contributed equally to this work. We are indebted to Fanny Weber-Göricke, Technische Universität Dresden, for assistance in data acquisition management. This work was funded by the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG; SFB 940/2). Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Alexander Strobel, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, 01062 Dresden, Germany. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Abstract Individuals tend to avoid cognitive demand, yet, individual differences appear to exist. Recent evidence from two studies suggests that individuals high in the personality traits Self- Control and Need for Cognition that are related to the broader construct Cognitive Effort Investment are less prone to avoid cognitive demand and show less effort discounting. These findings suggest that cost-benefit models of decision-making that integrate the costs due to effort should consider individual differences in the willingness to exert mental effort. However, to date, there are almost no replication attempts of the above findings. For the present conceptual replication, we concentrated on the avoidance of cognitive demand and used a longitudinal design and latent state-trait modeling.
    [Show full text]
  • Culture in Language and Cognition
    Chapter 37 in Xu Wen and John R. Taylor (Eds.) (2021) The Routledge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, pp. 387-407. Downloadable from https://psyarxiv.com/prm7u/ Preprint DOI 10.31234/osf.io/prm7u Culture in language and cognition Chris Sinha Abstract This Handbook chapter provides an overview of the interdisciplinary field of language, cognition and culture. The chapter explores the historical background of research from anthropological, psychological and linguistic perspectives. The key concepts of linguistic relativity, semiotic mediation and extended embodiment are explored and the field of cultural linguistics is outlined. Research methods are critically described. The state of the art in the key research topics of colour, space and time, and self and identities is outlined. Introduction Independence versus interdependence of language, mind and culture Cognitive Linguistics (CL) was forged in the matrix of cognitive sciences as a distinctive and highly interdisciplinary approach in linguistics. Foundational texts such as Lakoff (1987), Langacker (1987) and Talmy (2000) drew upon long but often neglected traditions in cognitive psychology, especially Gestalt psychology (Sinha 2007). A fundamental tenet of CL is that the cognitive capacities and processes that speakers and hearers employ in using language are domain-general: they underpin not only language, but also other areas of cognition and perception. This is in contrast with Generative (or Formal) Linguistics, to which CL historically was a critical reaction, which takes a modular view of both the human language faculty and of its subsystems. For Generative Linguists, not only is the subsystem of syntax autonomous from semantics and phonology, but language as a system is autonomous both from other cognitive processes, and from any influence by the culture and social organization of the language community.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Meme War:” the Alt-Right and Its Multifarious Enemies
    Angles New Perspectives on the Anglophone World 10 | 2020 Creating the Enemy The “Great Meme War:” the Alt-Right and its Multifarious Enemies Maxime Dafaure Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/angles/369 ISSN: 2274-2042 Publisher Société des Anglicistes de l'Enseignement Supérieur Electronic reference Maxime Dafaure, « The “Great Meme War:” the Alt-Right and its Multifarious Enemies », Angles [Online], 10 | 2020, Online since 01 April 2020, connection on 28 July 2020. URL : http:// journals.openedition.org/angles/369 This text was automatically generated on 28 July 2020. Angles. New Perspectives on the Anglophone World is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. The “Great Meme War:” the Alt-Right and its Multifarious Enemies 1 The “Great Meme War:” the Alt- Right and its Multifarious Enemies Maxime Dafaure Memes and the metapolitics of the alt-right 1 The alt-right has been a major actor of the online culture wars of the past few years. Since it came to prominence during the 2014 Gamergate controversy,1 this loosely- defined, puzzling movement has achieved mainstream recognition and has been the subject of discussion by journalists and scholars alike. Although the movement is notoriously difficult to define, a few overarching themes can be delineated: unequivocal rejections of immigration and multiculturalism among most, if not all, alt- right subgroups; an intense criticism of feminism, in particular within the manosphere community, which itself is divided into several clans with different goals and subcultures (men’s rights activists, Men Going Their Own Way, pick-up artists, incels).2 Demographically speaking, an overwhelming majority of alt-righters are white heterosexual males, one of the major social categories who feel dispossessed and resentful, as pointed out as early as in the mid-20th century by Daniel Bell, and more recently by Michael Kimmel (Angry White Men 2013) and Dick Howard (Les Ombres de l’Amérique 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Does 'Deplatforming' Work to Curb Hate Speech and Calls for Violence?
    Exercise Nº Professor´s Name Mark 1. Reading Comp. ………………… .…/20 2. Paraphrasing ………………… .…/30 Total Part I (Min. 26).…/50 Part Part I 3. Essay ………………… …/50 Re correction …………………… …/50 Essay Final Mark …………………… …/50 Part Part II (do NOT fill in) Total Part II (Min.26) …/50 CARRERA DE TRADUCTOR PÚBLICO - ENTRANCE EXAMINATION – FEBRERO 2021 NOMBRE y APELLIDO: …………………………………………………………………………… Nº de ORDEN: (NO es el DNI) ……………………………………………………………………. Please read the text carefully and then choose the best answer. Remember the questions do not follow the order of the reading passage (Paragraphs are numbered for the sake of correction) Does ‘deplatforming’ work to curb hate speech and calls for violence? 3 experts in online communications weigh in 1- In the wake of the assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, Twitter permanently suspended Donald Trump’s personal account, and Google, Apple, and Amazon shunned Parler, which at least temporarily shut down the social media platform favored by the far right. 2- Dubbed “deplatforming,” these actions restrict the ability of individuals and communities to communicate with each other and the public. Deplatforming raises ethical and legal questions, but foremost is the question of whether it is an effective strategy to reduce hate speech and calls for violence on social media. 3- The Conversation U.S. asked three experts in online communications whether deplatforming works and what happens when technology companies attempt it. Jeremy Blackburn, assistant professor of computer science, Binghamton University 4-Does deplatforming work from a technical perspective? Gab was the first “major” platform subject to deplatforming efforts, first with removal from app stores and, after the Tree of Life shooting, the withdrawal of cloud infrastructure providers, domain name providers and other Web-related services.
    [Show full text]
  • Behind the Black Bloc: an Overview of Militant Anarchism and Anti-Fascism
    Behind the Black Bloc An Overview of Militant Anarchism and Anti-Fascism Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, Samuel Hodgson, and Austin Blair June 2021 FOUNDATION FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES FOUNDATION Behind the Black Bloc An Overview of Militant Anarchism and Anti-Fascism Daveed Gartenstein-Ross Samuel Hodgson Austin Blair June 2021 FDD PRESS A division of the FOUNDATION FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES Washington, DC Behind the Black Bloc: An Overview of Militant Anarchism and Anti-Fascism Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 7 ORIGINS OF CONTEMPORARY ANARCHISM AND ANTI-FASCISM ....................................... 8 KEY TENETS AND TRENDS OF ANARCHISM AND ANTI-FASCISM ........................................ 10 Anarchism .............................................................................................................................................................10 Anti-Fascism .........................................................................................................................................................11 Related Movements ..............................................................................................................................................13 DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN MILITANT GROUPS ........................................................................ 13 Anti-Fascist Groups .............................................................................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • Deplatforming Misogyny
    Copyright © 2021 Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF) Published by Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF) 180 Dundas Street West, Suite 1420 Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1C7 www.leaf.ca LEAF is a national, charitable, non-profit organization, founded in 1985. LEAF works to advance the substantive equality rights of women and girls in Canada through litigation, law reform and public education using the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This publication was created as part of LEAF's Technology-Facilitated Violence (TFV) Project. The TFV Project brings together feminist lawyers and academics to conduct research and produce publications imagining legal responses to TFV against women and gender-diverse people that are informed by equality principles. The project also supports and informs LEAF’s law reform efforts and potential upcoming interventions concerning TFV. Acknowledgements Deep gratitude and appreciation go to the many people whose efforts and support made this publication possible. This report was researched and written by Cynthia Khoo, a technology and human rights lawyer and researcher. Cynthia holds an LL.M. (Concentration in Law and Technology) from the University of Ottawa, where she worked on cases as junior counsel at the Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC). Her paper on platform liability for emergent systemic harm to historically marginalized groups received the inaugural Ian R. Kerr Robotnik Memorial Award for the Best Paper by an Emerging Scholar at We Robot 2020. She has managed a sole practice law firm, Tekhnos Law, and obtained her J.D. from the University of Victoria.
    [Show full text]
  • Big Tech Vs Trump: Implications of Deplatforming
    www.rsis.edu.sg No. 078 – 10 May 2021 RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due recognition to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Mr Yang Razali Kassim, Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected]. Big Tech vs Trump: Implications of Deplatforming By Andressa Michelotti SYNOPSIS Deplatforming Donald Trump from the mainstream social media platforms might have contained his inflammatory discourse in the short term. However, this may well cause ripple effects that might have long-term implications for the future of social media and online speech. COMMENTARY IN JANUARY 2021, the major tech companies (Twitter, Facebook and Alphabet) ‘deplatformed’ Donald Trump from their products, a decision supported by 89 per cent of the Democrats. In late March, Trump’s senior adviser announced on Fox News that Trump should be returning to a social network of his own. Now that Trump is banned from the mainstream platforms, there is general scepticism about Trump’s abilities to scale and maintain his social media presence. Still, can Trump’s plan take off? In the current landscape, Trump is heavily dependent on the gatekeeping of Big Tech. Although his constituents might be looking forward to his next social media move, there are concerns that Trump’s team can effectively develop an environment that can attract his followers.
    [Show full text]